so, I assume there is an alpha set for the individual games? we enjoyed oob japanese obliteration of the allies first round. I cant imagine how you would explain USA west coast having the 10 and 40 with the new rules. I dont see a war time economy bonus like in the oob game. I feel like this is an entirely different game with new setup instructions, I appreciate the hard work of the play testers, but a 3rd set of revised rules, really, I want a new Rule book. Maybe a new map board too. meh.

My friend and I play a lot. We call it lunch moves. We set up a board in my living room for weeks at a time, making moves at lunch breaks. After playing on a huge print out of the 1942 map with 2 sets of men and chips, so often we can set up from memory, we got the 1940 game, and have been loving the new stuff, tactical bombers, mechanized infantry, air and navy bases are wonderful additions.

From reading the books and setting up just one time, I decided it would be best to superglue the starting bases to the map to ease the pain of set up time. (figuring upgradable complexes could be stacked on top of, and IPCs of damage could be represented off map if need be, no problems so far). I then read an errata forum that announced a set up snafu in the anzacs, placing a minor complex in south wales, and taking the complex out of new zealand, also giving a naval and air base to the philipinnes. No problem, but the more I read into the forums, the more rule changes I see.

I guess you have been living the rules so long, you left me and my buddy behind. We like having the actual manual to reference to through restrictions in our faces for bragging rights, but it seems we have to go online for this now. My question to you cats, should we go by the Alpha 3 rules? http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=6149
We really want to play some pros in cincinnati or columbus, we have some good plays, but now we are starting to wonder how different the rules would be if we tried to up our game with the vets.

We played a round, where japan took sydney first turn, and killed it, until I read that bombardments cannot occur in seazones that were hostile in combat, or that transports cannot unload if there is a submarine present. I think we play a few rules incorrectly. One I have been trying to stick my partner on is the damaged acs, once damage is taken, planes have to land a space away. I let him take hits on the ac, then I withdraw my attack, sinking his planes.

All in all, I see the objectives in the book, I see them in the above link, and I see a big difference. I see a difference in aa guns. I see differences in the mongolian front. Im starting to wonder what rules I would be presented with at an event.
Can any veterans lend a hand? We play weekly, and I have even started a database to track trends in purchases, losses, kills, ipcs gained, national objectives, etc. We have a killer japanese strategy we cannot counter, but I wonder if it is because we are playing with a bad set of rules.

Craig, Krieghund, thank you so much for your expertise. I cant find many people to play in Cleveland. I wish we could be playing online so you can teach me a thing or two about defeat and humility. I am taking this game way too seriously. I invite my pals over for strategy discussions, and have game night once a week.

thanks for the speedy response. about the retreat, could the transports retreat one space, and dump cargo on say, Japanese controlled hawaii?

Alright, I need a pro to answer this question for me.

An argument ensued after a japanese amphibious assault was launched on US controlled midway island.  US had a navy with carriers holding fighters, and land units on the island. The japanese navy wiped out the US navy and air units, with the exception of one US fighter and one japanese battleship with one hit on it remaining.

At this point, I explained that the Japanese battleship had to destroy the US fighter, clearing the sea zone, in order to continue to the next step of the amphibious assaut. My opponent, the Japanese, declared that the sea combat was successful because there were no defending warships, just a US fighter remaining. His battleship missed and my fighter hit the battleship.

Please clarify rules on this scenario, and furthermore what happens to the transports and their cargo?

I have been training my team for awhile now. Just kidding, a few friends gather in my war room on wednesday nights til thursday morning to see if the allies can be defeated. We are looking for more like minded individuals to play aa 1942 with us. We dont have house rules really, we just started to utilize the escort interceptor rules.  I believe we have a good handle on the game, just want some new faces to help resolve the war. I hope we can find you, we are willing to change the day, but I work weekends. It doesnt matter, I will change my schedule around a game. email me at dnalevelc2003@hotmail.com for directions to my place in tremont.

safe journeys.

dnalevelc

im not an AA:50 Player, but Ive been playing the hell out of 42. Last night was the first time I used the interceptor/ escort rule. Up til now, Ive been Strat bombing the hell out of germany with little repurcussions, and Ive crippled the war machine.  This game was completely different. The axis kept a stock of fighters in germany outnumbering my fighters  by at least one per round.  I closed off southern europe with Strat bombing and took it over.  It took 7 rounds, but I took over every german country except germany itself.  I was even able to wipe out the massive Japanese fleet with the US bombers I was planning on Strat bombing Germany with when they attempted to amphib assault in alaska. I still have much to learn for good strategy, but it was interesting how the game changes with the optional rule. I know I need a better strategy against the Japanese. I want to invade Japan!

Now that I’ve read up on sub vs sub, I’m happy to know that the defender has to declare submersion before the megalomaniacal attacker rolls. Upon exploring this escort/interceptor rule, hearing that escorts without defending interceptors are useless, I got to thinking. Does the defender declare if he is using interceptors before the strat bombing? It would suck to bring your airforce in to risk aa fire and not be of use due to the defender deciding not to use his fighters as interceptors. I suggest
1. Declare strat bombing
2. Defender declares interceptors
3. Attacker declares escorts
4. combat ensues.

I know it won’t fly, so to speak, but just as my pals were waiting to see if my attack sub would miss before deciding to submerge, a rule I will have to school them on… I feel the defender has an opportunity to dupe the attacker into sending fighters into a trap. I understand the defender needs the advantage, but I would like the opportunity to turn my escorts around when there is no resistance. Pros?

so when can I get my megalomaniacal hands on an FAQ and Errata document for AA1942?

this is Alcoholics Anonymous, oh Im sorry I thought it was game night…